Hiring a contractor or sub-contractor is often appealing to time-poor, cash-strapped small business owners. One big reason is that they take care of their own insurance (as opposed to the business owner having to provide coverage for them, as is the case with employees). But what if things aren’t quite that straightforward?

Imagine the following scenario. You hire a plumber to fix a leak at your workplace. He solders a pipe and your building catches fire. What was a $200 job results in $1 million in damage. You go after the plumber only to discover he doesn’t have the right (or any) insurance or assets you can get your hands on. If you have the right property insurance you may receive a pay-out. But what if it only covers you up to $500,000? Chances are you’ll be left with a shortfall and that could sink your business.

“It’s crucial for small businesses to check that contractors and sub-contractors have their own insurance in place. You should request a copy [of the policy]”, says John Clark, Steadfast Broker Support Manager.

What policy? Well, that depends on the job but a humble suburban tradesman will often have contract works, public and products liability, professional indemnity and workers’ compensation insurance. Err on the side of caution when checking that any contractors or sub-contractors you use show you all the relevant policies to provide proof, so you are unlikely to be left on the hook if they, or one of their team, starts a fire or falls over and breaks a leg.

” It’s crucial for small businesses to check that contractors and sub-contractors have their own insurance in place. “

Employee or sub-contractor?

It’s a question that causes confusion but one that business owners need to be clear about to avoid insurance issues in a worse-case scenario.

In theory, an employee works in the business while sub-contractors run their own business and supply a service. For example, the wait staff at a restaurant are likely to be employees while the person who cleans it (and provides similar cleaning services to other restaurants) is likely to be a contractor or sub-contractor.

In practice, the lines can blur. For example, a person can be a contractor for tax purposes but still be deemed an employee when it comes to workers’ compensation insurance. If someone a business owner thinks is a sub-contractor can be classified as an employee (under any circumstances), that business owner has a lot more liability than they realise, should anything go wrong.

Each state and territory has its own rules around the demarcations between employees and contractors/sub-contractors for workers’ compensation, so checking the relevant websites is a good place to start. Then seek legal advice if you’re worried you might have an employee on your hands rather than a contractor or subcontractor.

Workers’ compensation and public liability

Workers’ compensation insurance is compulsory for all employers in Australia to protect employees if they suffer a work-related injury or illness. The same goes for sub-contractors who hire workers to help with a job. “If you employ people, get advice as to your workers’ comp obligations in your state or territory,” says Clark.

So, what should you look out for?

As with most things business – related, it’s always best to get it in writing. That is, have any contractors or sub-contractors you use sign a contract before they step foot on the premises. Contracts need to be properly drafted and spell out the chain of liability, to give both parties legal protection. All parties – employers, contractors and sub-contractors – should pay special attention to indemnity clauses that can shift all liability for death, injury or loss onto them.

“People often rush in and sign a contract without looking at it carefully. If you go on to make a claim your insurance might not cover you because you signed something you shouldn’t have,” says Clark.

One common but important exclusion is contractual liability. This can exclude insurance cover if you sign a contract that reduces your rights to less than they normally would be at common law (for example, if you agree in a contract not to sue a contractor for their own negligence).

If you’re an employer or sub-contractor who wants some expert guidance about insurance matters, talk to a Steadfast insurance broker today.

http://optimus1.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/1170x557-subcontractor.jpg5571170Optimus1http://optimus1.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/logo-lrg.pngOptimus12017-09-08 06:53:452017-09-11 10:27:57Insurance and contractors: have you got it covered?

In recent weeks the news media in Australia has reported many examples of inferior products being used in the building industry. The reports document the use of non-compliant products, such as cladding, cabling, wiring and lighting being installed in domestic and commercial buildings. Some suspect installations have resulted in serious damage with ongoing fire investigations but all products reviewed by authorities have been exposed as potential risks to either cause fire or act as an accelerant.

Trends in consumerism is to make a product cheaply for a shorter shelf life knowing it can be replaced cheaply in a ‘buy and replace’ purchase cycle. For building products however, we also want the assurance that our houses are long term secure in their construction and internal fit-out.

The cause of these building material risks can be traced back in some cases to inferior products being imported that are not meeting Australian Quality Control measures. An added problem is that designs are specified with materials which are then replaced with a replication of the intended original material or product. In a lean economy the temptation exists to look for cheaper alternatives to combat narrow profit margins.

This may also muddy the water with the rating of insurance premiums. Property risks are calculated on the materials of construction so it does have a bearing if the materials are combustible, mixed or of inferior construction. This must be assessed, declared accurately and obviously, if a fire risk is increased, it must be addressed.

Australia’s reliance on offshore manufacturing has caused the transfer of responsibility to manufacturers with various importers and distributors proving difficult to supervise and monitor to appropriate standards.
The manufacturer / importer has a responsibility not only as a measure
to sustain a reputable business, but also as a community responsibility to put stringent measures in place which would prevent property loss and worst case scenarios.

Industry and Australian Standards exist and have individual rating codes for applicable products. The importer must have a testing protocol and recall procedure that can be demonstrated. Associations such as Master Builders, Master Electricians, Housing Industry Association etc., also provide a forum for the members and the public to highlight issues and all are proactive in raising concerns and bringing problem cases to light.

The risk exposure would also be assisted by having adequate Product Recall insurance to cover incurred costs which are not limited to the product, but may also include advertising, recall notifications, repairs, loss of profits and rehabilitation.

A small chocolatier based outside of Adelaide, Chocolate @ No. 5, has been forced to redesign its logo after multinational fashion giant Chanel claimed a trademark infringement of its perfume, Chanel No. 5.

Chanel disputed the use of ‘No. 5’ in the chocolatier’s logo when the chocolatier recently applied for a trademark registration. The chocolatier maintains that the number five in the logo refers to the number of its street address and is not used because of any potential connection to Chanel.

Chanel’s lawyers sent the chocolatier a ‘cease and desist’ letter demanding that the chocolatier withdraw its registration, ditch its logo and to rename the business if it was to move from its current address.The chocolatier has since spent thousands of dollars changing the branding of the business in order to avoid a legal battle with the luxury retailer.

Amidst the many challenges entrepreneurs face when starting a business, it is not hard to see how many overlook the need to register their business name and branding as trademarks.However, they can pay a high price for the oversight.

To ensure a new business has the best chance of success, entrepreneurs must be aware of what is involved.As a starting point, they need to consider which business structure best suits their needs, apply for their Australian Business Number, check that their chosen business name is available and register their business name and branding as trademarks, preferably before the business commences trading to ensure interests of the enterprise are covered.

Large companies are often vigorous in protecting their trademarks and intellectual property and Chocolate @ No. 5 is not the only one to pay the price. There have been many instances of small companies being forced to relinquish their logos, business names and web domain names on the basis that they potentially infringe a large company’s trademark rights.

While it takes forethought and planning to address these risks from the beginning, the eventual payout is sweet.

The common misconception is that all you have to do is pay well. Many studies have found that this is simply not the case… in fact, it generally comes in around third or fourth on the employee list of ‘job satisfaction’ priorities. Paying a fair and reasonable salary is expected but of high priority is the need to provide a great company culture. What that really means is provide a great company atmosphere. Make it a happy place to be and strive to create a culture where everyone gets along and helps fellow employees – cultivate real team spirit. Also have a company-wide rule – ‘always do the right thing by our clients’. Maintain a positive ethos at all levels of the business and recognise the value of good humour.

Doing as much as you can to create a great atmosphere at work goes a long way to retaining quality staff.

On the relationship building and work side of things, here are more suggestions to help develop the desired culture in your business:

Get to know your staff: Although you need to be mindful of privacy considerations, try to find out what drives them…. different people have different triggers and finding out what they are will help in your relationship.

Develop their skills: Training is a critical factor, as it not only provides benefits for your business but also identifies a career path for them and can help develop their aspirations.

Engage them in the business: If people feel connected with the values and direction of the business, they will be comfortable putting forward their views. By having the opportunity to ‘have a say’, they see that their work and they themselves are important to the business. It takes appreciated, valued employees to ensure long-term success for any business.

Provide feedback: Not just the traditional annual Performance Review and measuring of KPI’s… it’s an ongoing position of providing feedback; positive and appreciative feedback when it’s due and swift course correction in areas that need improvement.

Remember, times change, so don’t expect to keep good staff forever. It’s unlikely that you will be able to offer the flow of opportunities that the really good ones will be seeking. But they will contribute their energy and passion while working with you, provided you fulfill your side of the relationship.

Recent changes to transport laws now hold more individuals and companies in the transport chain accountable for breaches.

The Heavy Vehicle National Law (HVNL) commenced in 2014 and applies in all States of Australia except Western Australia. The legislation applies to all vehicles that have a GVM (Gross Vehicle Mass) or ATM (Aggregate Trailer Mass) of more than 4.5 tonnes.

The HVNL makes complying with transport laws the responsibility of everyone in the transport chain, not just drivers and operators. This approach recognises that actions, inactions and demands made by off-the-road parties play a role in road safety.

Under the chain of responsibility provisions of the HVNL, consignors, packers, loaders, schedulers and consignees must all take reasonable steps to prevent breaches of laws in relation to mass, dimension, loading, speed and fatigue. As well, an ‘executive officer’ of any party in the chain can be responsible for a breach of the law by another party if they knowingly authorised or permitted the conduct or if they knew or ought reasonably to have known that there was a substantial risk that an offence would be committed.

The potential penalties under the legislation are significant. For example, the maximum penalty for a single offence involving a critical breach of the fatigue regulations is $15,000 for an individual and a five times multiplier (making the penalty $75,000) can be applied if the offender is a corporation. The offence of tampering with a speed limiter attracts a penalty of $10,000. Similar fines apply for offences such as severe overloading or speeding. The law also provides for heavy penalties to be imposed on parties who enter into contracts that encourage or provide an incentive for any party in the chain of responsibility to speed.

In addition to fines and penalties, the legislation gives the courts power to impose penalties that reflect the commercial benefits that an offender has derived from offences. Persistent offenders can also be subject to intervention orders and prohibition orders banning them from being involved with the transport industry for up to one year.

Many business owners are unaware their standard business package insurance will not cover pollution remediation. It’s likely that contractors and other professionals working on major infrastructure and construction projects will have appropriate cover, but the cover is not just for heavy industry. Businesses with high risk include dry cleaners and hair salons due to chemicals they store and use. Service stations are vulnerable because of the potential leakage from underground storage tanks and pipes corroding over time.

Recently there was a $300,000 clean-up claim from a contractor that had serviced pipes at a petrol station. An explosion at a sewerage plant, some kilometres away, was traced back to the service station, and it was discovered that pollutants had flowed into the water table.

Pollution incidents are not confined to heavy industrial sites, they can also be caused by small businesses or individuals such as contractors or subcontractors – for example, due to a failure to install proper sediment controls while undertaking earthworks.

Independent contractors need to protect themselves against any claims of damage caused by the work they do or have done. One type of cover that may be suitable is pollution liability insurance. This cover protects an entity against liability from damage caused by hazardous waste materials. The reality is that environmental clean-up projects can cost millions of dollars.

It’s too late to buy cover if you cause an incident and you should be aware that pollution liability is not covered under a general liability policy. Some policies may provide coverage only for sudden and accidental events, but exclude gradual pollution events and the cover may specifically exclude clean-up costs.

Mould, Legionella, noise and odour are also considered pollutions and may be covered by an environmental insurance policy.

If you think you may have a risk of hazardous waste exposure in your business operations, it is a good idea to consult with your insurance broker about the need for pollution liability insurance.

With the recent election of the Labor government in Queensland, the repeal of the impairment threshold for access to common law claims arising out of workplace injuries seems imminent.

Changes to the WorkCover scheme, introduced in October 2013, meant that workers assessed with 5% impairment or less do not have access to claims for common law damages against their employers. Consequently, injured workers who do not meet the threshold are more likely to make direct claims against other parties, such as host employers, occupiers and contractors. Those parties in turn will inevitably seek indemnity and contribution from employers, where they have a right to sue under the contractual agreement between the parties.

The introduction of the threshold was intended to reduce common law claims for employers, thereby resulting in reduced workers’ compensation premiums. However, in practice, it has caused problems for employers in other areas.

Notably, in many instances, employers may be uninsured for claims by third parties because other insurance arrangements that employers have in place, such as public liability policies, may not respond to these claims.

The repeal of the impairment threshold will give back to workers the right to access common law damages against employers. This will likely reduce issues for employers regarding claims made under contract by third parties, and transfer the exposure back to WorkCover Queensland.

While the repeal of the threshold appears to be imminent, it remains to be seen whether the Labor government can or will remove the threshold retrospectively.

It is important for employers to ensure they understand their rights and obligations under the workers’ compensation regime, and are aware of how contractual agreements with third parties may impact on these rights and obligations, and what additional insurance arrangements may be required to adequately protect themselves against third party claims.

For decades, the employment section of the newspaper was traditionally the way job seekers got connected with employers…but that doesn’t work anymore! Job seekers, especially young ones, just don’t bother looking there.

The job-hunting space has been taken over by web-based employment agencies such as Seek and myriad jobs boards in niche industries, colleges and universities. Social media in all its forms also offers opportunities for employers seeking staff. With some exceptions, 21st century technology has seen the demise of newspaper classifieds as the conduit between a job seeker and their next job.

On the upside, internet-based employee hunting is proving a cheaper and more efficient way of finding that ‘ideal’ person.

On the downside, it can mean that employers will receive a large number of applications from people who do not have the required skills or experience. Reducing the deluge of applications to a short list takes a lot of time and resources.

An alternative is the recruitment company. They have extensive databases of ‘good fit’ potential candidates which enables them to provide suitable applicants at short notice. Recruitment agencies can be costly, however, a benefit is the ‘suitability guarantee’ that usually comes with the successful candidate.

Another difficulty for employers, especially in very small businesses (2 to 5 staff), is the many hats that an employee in a small firm needs to wear. The ability to multi-task with reasonable efficiency is not everyone’s idea of a perfect job. Fortunately, there are many individuals who thrive on the stimulation of job variety rather than the fixed, clearly defined job role description that starts ‘here’ and ends ‘there’.

Generally, people who are comfortable multi-tasking and working across different roles, are the diamonds that small business is looking for to provide the necessary flexibility, so essential in small business.

http://optimus1.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/logo-lrg.png00Optimus1http://optimus1.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/logo-lrg.pngOptimus12015-04-03 06:00:172015-03-11 06:39:25How do you find good staff?

The Australian Taxation Office (ATO) has stated their intention to increase their audit focus on businesses that use contractors.

An incorrect employment classification of an employee / contractor could be a breach of both ATO and Workers Compensation legislation.

If ATO determine that your contractors are employees, you would have a shortfall in your Superannuation and PAYG payments and subsequently incur interest and penalties. In theory ATO can go back an unlimited period to collect the superannuation and PAYG for employees.

In past years there was confusion for business owners about the definition of a worker as the ATO definition was different to WorkCover Queensland’s definition.

Today the definitions have been aligned. WorkCover Queensland has adopted the same definition as the ATO who supply a simple online decision tool to identify ‘Employee or Contractor’.

At the end of the questionnaire a decision is provided based on answers given. You are able to enter personal details and a report can be produced for you to print /save. Retain a copy for your records and if audited, you have a documented basis on which you made your decision.

An important factor is the existence and content of a written agreement between you and the individual. You should consider obtaining legal advice in regard to any contractor’s agreement.

It is important to discuss all your labour arrangements with your CQIB insurance broker as contractor or labour-hire alters your exposures hence the need to tailor your insurance program to your specific needs.

http://optimus1.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/logo-lrg.png00Optimus1http://optimus1.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/logo-lrg.pngOptimus12014-09-16 03:32:052014-10-02 00:20:45ATO turn the spotlight on employees as contractors

Business owners beware! Even if you or your businesses are not active in the social media space, your employees’ online actions can have a lasting real life impact.

In a well-known case from 2011, an employee of Linfox Australia Pty Ltd was dismissed for posting offensive and discriminatory comments about two of his managers on his Facebook profile page.

The Fair Work Commissioner recognised that the posted comments were ‘outrageous and distasteful’, but found that Linfox did not have grounds to dismiss the employee. At the time of the dismissal and the hearing, Linfox did not have a social media policy.

In the recent case of Malcolm Pearson v Linfox Australia Pty Ltd [2014], the Fair Work Commission held that it is not “harsh, unjust, or unreasonable” to expect an employee to comply with a social media policy that operates outside, as well as inside, the workplace. In this case, Linfox (presumably having learned from its previous experience) had implemented a social media policy and Mr Pearson’s refusal to sign this policy, amongst other shortcomings, constituted a valid reason for dismissal. The Commission dismissed the unfair dismissal case on the basis that the social media policy was a legitimate exercise by Linfox in protecting its reputation and security. The Commission recognised that the natural overlap between public and private life makes such an “invasive” policy necessary.

“It is difficult to see how a social media policy designed to protect an employer’s reputation and the security of the business could operate in an ‘at work’ context only…Gone is the time where an employee might claim posts on social media are intended to be for private consumption only.”

These decisions form part of an evolving body of case law that reflects the increasing prevalence of social media and a more sophisticated understanding of its implications in the workplace.

So what should employers do to protect their interests? Most experts agree that employers should:

Implement a comprehensive social media policy

Adequately train their employees in the policy and ensure they are aware of the employer’s expectations around social media in and out of the workplace, and

Regularly review the policy to maintain currency.

Employers should be mindful that courts and tribunals are increasingly willing to hold employees accountable for social media misuse. Hence, employers should not shy away from robust disciplinary actions when the circumstances are appropriate.